Ballots to remain uncounted in MI and Stein blocked in Philly. Guest: Election integrity, law expert Paul Lehto says this proves 'only option is to get it right on Election Night'. Also: Trump taps climate denier, fossil-fuel tool for EPA...

Special to The BRAD BLOG by Guest Blogger and Freelance Network News Producer, Rebecca Abrahams

In September, 2003 Linda Lamone, the Administrator of Maryland's State Board of Elections and President of the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) hands over a critical study on the security of the Diebold Election Systems machines that count all of Maryland's votes.

Between the time that the State of Maryland commissioned the highly respected Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC) to evaluate the effectiveness and security of their electronic voting machines and the time that the study is made public, critical pieces of information have been edited, omitted and, in some cases, words added, to fundamentally alter the original meaning of the report's conclusions.

The original SAIC report, coming in at nearly 200 pages, was reduced, redacted and altered such that the only version the public --- or even state officials including the Governor and the full State Board of Elections --- would ever be allowed to see was a wholly sanitized 38-page version of the report.

Until now.

For the first time, we've been able to review the complete, much sought-after, unredacted version of the SAIC report which has been kept at bay from Maryland state officials…as well as the computer science and security community…as well as the election integrity community and public at large since it was originally completed in 2003.

It has been called "The Pentagon Papers of Electronic Voting Systems" by some members of the computer science and security community.

Our EXCLUSIVE access to that document --- which we will be releasing in full shortly --- was made possible by a patriot whistleblower. The information, some of which is detailed below, could be explosive in the final days before the Midterm Elections.

As well, a transcript of an EXCLUSIVE unaired network interview that I carried out with Lamone --- in which she tore off her microphone and cut off the interview after I dared to confront her on some of these issues --- will follow below as well…

Enter the world of electronic voting machines, the 2002 "cure" to 2000's hanging and dimpled chads.

It is a seamy world of secrecy, proprietary software, partisan executives "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president," politicians asking programmers to design software to flip vote totals, and lots and lots of money.

And it is a world of completely inconsistent realities. Diebold and the other manufacturers insist that their machines are safe and secure yet every single cyber security expert and computer scientist has, for years, been screaming into an empty wilderness of media attention, that...

The machines can be hacked, by the implanting of malicious code, at the factory

What makes this SAIC report, "The Pentagon Papers of Electronic Voting" as some computer experts have described it, so important is that:

It shows, in black and white, that what Diebold says to election officials and voters across the country is not the truth.

It shows that there are virtually no security protocols in place for certain Diebold machines and that the recommended security protocols were purposely removed from the publicy released version of the report.

It shows that the analyzed Diebold machines were not functional nor secure for use in elections and raises serious doubts that they are ready for the November 7, 2006 Midterm elections.

The complete study, dated September 17, 2003, is the response to research performed by Johns Hopkins University Computer Science Professor Avi Rubin citing severe security flaws on the Diebold touch screen machines, including a surprising lack of security, (encryption), on the memory cards. Maryland sought to ascertain whether their Diebold Touch Screen machines were, in fact, safe for Maryland voters to use. Maryland, along with Georgia, was one of the two original "http://www.bradblog.com/?p=2433\">showcase states" to implement Diebold's new proprietary touch-screen DRE (Direct Recording Electronic) voting machines.

But Diebold, in return for allowing their super secret, proprietary machines to be examined by the independent laboratory, insisted on two huge concessions from the State of Maryland.

First, SAIC would not be allowed to even look at the source code, the heart and guts of electronic voting machines. Second, they would be allowed to go through the SAIC Report, line by line, and redact anything and everything that they felt was proprietary, had a potential for security breaches or could provide a roadmap for anyone who wanted to compromise the system.

In other words, whatever they wanted to do with the publicly released version of the report they were allowed to do so.

In addition to its value in showing the massive difference between the public and private, redacted and un-redacted faces of Diebold, this document is exceedingly relevant, and presents yet a new raft of troubling revelations, as we go into the November 7 elections. 468 federal seats and countless state and local contests are being decided by Diebold and other similar electronic voting machines. The outcome of these elections will set the direction of our country for at least the next two years.

The issue is whether or not Diebold has implemented the critical changes in its software and hardware called for by the full, genuine un-redacted SAIC Report. What makes this so very important is that the software --- including the core “source code” that runs the machines that will process and count almost all of America’s vote on November 7 --- is as secret as the formula for Coca Cola and recipe for Kentucky Fried Chicken. Why tabulators, for example, which act as nothing more than an elaborate abacus, employ “proprietary software”, completely hidden from election officials, Secretaries of State, Attorneys General and even the Governor of every state, is a true mystery and raises huge and angry suspicions within the computer scientist and cyber security communities.

And no one, except these four private, for-profit corporations, Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia and Hart Intercivic, is allowed to see or inspect the software (and the core source code) to EVER know if the machines have operated properly or if there was, or is, malicious software that could alter the vote.

Now we come back to Maryland's State Election Director, Linda Lamone.

It seems that Maryland’s State Board of Elections (SBE), under orders from Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich, hired another firm, Freeman, Craft and McGregor, to review the vulnerabilities identified in the SAIC Report, the real, unredacted version, in order to confirm to the Governor and the State that all of the issues addressed had been corrected by Diebold.

The Freeman report has been completed but Linda Lamone, despite briefing her own staff about it on August 11, 2006, refuses to disclose its contents to Governor Ehrlich and even refused to release it to her board, saying it was "proprietary" until this past Monday.

Lamone's dictatorial control over information in Maryland doesn't stop there.

Remarkably, Lamone didn't even allow Giles Berger, the Chairman of the Board of Elections, to see the original, un-redacted SAIC report. He and his staff --- the people who were charged with oversight over the execution of elections and the training of local boards on these machines --- have only been allowed to see the much smaller report, redacted and altered by Diebold.

What are they hiding from the State of Maryland? What are they hiding from America’s voters??

Maryland, the computer science and security community and all Americas may finally be able to find out.

As a result of the courage of a top Maryland official, we have been able to obtain the entire SAIC report, showing the Diebold edits, omissions and additions.

Now we can see, precisely, what Diebold is...and should be, afraid of!

The full State of Maryland Electronic Voting System Security Study, conducted by The SAIC and delivered to Maryland on September 17, 2003 is 152 pages plus 41 pages of appendices. The report that Linda Lamone handed to the Governor and to her own Board members was only 38 pages. 38 pages!

In total there are hundreds of edits, omission and additions. Here are a few examples:

In response both SBE (Maryland State Board of Elections) and Diebold stated that the devices do not operate on the Internet, and that the State's procedural controls reduce or eliminate many of the vulnerabilities identified in the report.

Un-submitted Edited Version:

In response both SBE and Diebold affirmed that the devices do not operate on the Internet, and the State's procedural controls reduce or eliminate many, if not all, of the vulnerabilities identified in the report.

Redacted Report as Submitted:

Completely Omitted

...EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PAGE 3...

Original Unredacted SAIC Report:

Risks identified were predominantly associated with a wide variety of administrative controls for voting system security. Among management and operational controls, SAIC found risks in the controls on access to servers, administration of passwords, use of system audit logs, intrusion detection and level of security training for elections personnel.

SAIC concluded that with the management and operational procedures currently in use, the risk of system compromise is high. SAIC indicated however that these vulnerabilities can be mitigated by adequate security planning and administration

Un-submitted Edited Version:

Risks identified were predominantly associated with a wide variety of ABSENT administrative controls for voting system security. Among management and operational controls, SAIC found risks in the controls on access to servers, administration of passwords, use of system audit logs, intrusion detection and level of security training for elections personnel.

SAIC concluded that with the management and operational procedures currently in use, the risk of system compromise is high. SAIC indicated however that these vulnerabilities can be mitigated, if not eliminated, by adequate security planning and administration.

Redacted Report as Submitted:

Completely Omitted

...PAGE 5...

Original Unredacted SAIC Report:

2.1.4 SBE does not require the secure transmission of election vote totals

"The SBE does not require encryption for the election results transmitted from the local polling sites to the LBE. Those results are transmitted over a private, point to point connection, via modem. Those transmitted results become the official results after the canvassing process is completed. A 100% verification of the transmitted totals to the original PCMCIA cards (i.e., computer memory storage of actual vote totals) or the paper totals is not performed.”

Redacted Report as Submitted:

"The SBE does not require encryption for the election results transmitted from the local polling sites to the LBE. Those transmitted results become the official results after the canvassing process is completed. A 100% verification of the transmitted totals to the original PCMCIA cards (i.e., computer memory storage of actual vote totals) or the paper totals is not performed.”

There is no documentation that describes security controls for detecting unauthorized transaction attempts by authorized or unauthorized users. Therefore, the application of security controls may be applied inconsistently, incorrectly or incompletely.

Since a threat source is more likely to exploit a system if the evidence of his/her actions cannot be gathered or will go undetected, failure to have controls for detection increases the likelihood of system attacks, and consequently, of system compromise:

Redacted Report as Submitted:

Completely Omitted

...PAGE 7...

Original Unredacted SAIC Report:

2.1.9: No documentation currently exists regarding appropriate access controls to the AccuVote-TS voting system

There is no documentation that identifies the process for maintaining appropriate access controls to the AccuVote-TS voting system. Without proper documentation, the consistent implementation of security controls cannot be verified or validated.

The lack of proper documentation has resulted in the vendor default settings being left in place with the default user ID in the configuration. This information (i.e., passwords) is also documented in various manuals.

Failure to correctly document access procedures, and use of vendor default passwords allows anyone with access to those documented passwords authenticated user privileges to the system. That access would allow the unauthorized user to do anything the legitimate user could do.

Redacted Report as Submitted:

Completely Omitted

...PAGE 8...

Original Unredacted SAIC Report:

2.3.1 Audit logs are not configured properly and are not reviewed

The GEMS server audit logs are not configured to log any security events (i.e., extended logging) at the operating system level and the current log size is too small. Consequently, recorded events are overwritten. In addition, the audit logs are not reviewed.

Failure to properly log and to review those logs makes it significantly more likely that an intruder’s actions will not be detected. Assurance on non-detection may encourage a possible intruder to attempt a penetration of the system.

We recommend that the Windows 2000 operating system be configured to audit all security events and the log size should be set to an appropriate size. We also recommend that the event logs be reviewed on a regular basis.

Redacted Report as Submitted:

Completely Omitted

Despite its original date, and Diebold's claims that all problems have been remedied with its machines, the report is considered to be a serious "smoking gun" by the very few computer experts who have seen it. It is evidence, they say, of a very purposeful plan by Diebold to hide the operational and security flaws on the machines that count all of the votes in Maryland and Georgia and many of the votes in states across the country.

The extreme sensitivity to investigation of Diebold voting hardware and software by Linda Lamone --- the person who many say has been responsible for helping to "sell" Diebold systems to election directors across the country and even internationally --- played out in a highly unusual unaired network television interview.

Lamone, the former President of the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED), was chiefly responsible for making recommendations to other states on which electronic voting machines they should use. Lamone is acutely aware of the problems associated with Diebold voting machines, yet remains steadfast in her defense of them.

In her offices in Annapolis, Maryland last month, with a Diebold touch screen voting machine proudly displayed right behind her, Lamone abruptly stopped our interview, ripped off her microphone and walked off when I asked about the source code – and whether she believed its counting software should remain secretly controlled by Diebold.

Here's a transcript of that section of my unaired October 2006 interview with Lamone…

ABRAHAMS: Alright so you don’t want to talk about the source code issues at all? (Lamone shakes head no) It is not relevant that we know that source code has been viewed?

LAMONE:(looking at someone off camera) Yeah the ITA [federal "Independent Testing Authority"] did it. And that whole system has been taken over by the National Institute for Standards and Technology [NIST] in partnership with the [U.S.] Election Assistance Commission [EAC]. We are because I am participating in this are writing new, we have written new standards against which the voting systems are going to start being tested next year. I am participating in another project with the Election Assistance Commission to write management guidelines covering security and other issues for election officials across the United States.

ABRAHAMS: The reasons honestly why I ask the questions about the source code is because there are a lot of people out there- elected officials and scientists who say even if the machines are secure when those memory cards are taken to the tabulator and those tabulators count the votes we don’t know how the votes are counted. The state doesn’t know and the state has not been able to see the source code so it is an issue of voter confidence.

LAMONE: I think you are in fantasy land. (speaking to someone off camera) I think I want to end this.

ABRAHAMS: I am not in fantasy land- I just have a couple more questions

LAMONE: No (takes off her microphone)

ABRAHAMS: You don’t want to finish? I just have a couple more questions…

LAMONE: No! (Finishes taking the microphone off and speaks to someone off camera)

ABRAHAMS: I don’t know why you don’t wish to continue this. I am asking you legitimate questions relating to the Diebold voting systems.

Given the voting system breakdowns and malfunctions in Maryland during the September 2006 Primaries and the upcoming November 7 Midterms, the edits to the SAIC study and the reactions of Lamone during my recent interview are of great concern to those studying the concerns about electronic voting.

This is ever more so, according to the experts, because in 2002, under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), America effectively turned its elections --- and in a very real sense, its Democracy --- over to Diebold and three other private for-profit corporations; ES&S (Election Software & Systems), Sequoia and Hart Intercivic.

These four corporations make the Electronic Poll (E-Poll) books that now hold America's voter rolls as well as the electronic voting machines that process America's votes and the tabulators that count them.

There is still time, for a courageous Secretary of State, Attorney General or Governor, to stand up and publicly demand that Diebold and the other manufacturers do the following:

Prove that the many recommendations, contained in the un-redacted SAIC Report, have been complied with.

In Maryland, release the Freeman, Craft, McGregor Report showing what, if anything, has been fixed since the SAIC Report

Make the electronic voting machines and tabulators available immediately before, during and after the November 7 election for identified, certified computer scientists from the state government, (an “Election Swat Team”) to inspect for evidence of tampering, factory installed malicious code, malicious code that might have been added after leaving the factory, malicious code that might have been added during the election.

Make emergency Paper Ballots available for all voters who are not comfortable trusting the electronic machines. If the counties across this country have to pay Rush Fees to printers in their jurisdiction, so be it. Democracy demands nothing less.

We do not have only Diebold to blame for the critical position the un-redacted SAIC Report shows we are in. The Federal Government, despite mandating these machines has refused to exercise any oversight over them and bears huge responsibility, from The White House to the Congress.

George Bush’s own appointee to the Chair of the EAC, the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission, Rev. DeForest Soaries, quit that post, stating, rather dramatically that, “There is no prototype. There are no standards. There is no scientific research that would guarantee any election district that there’s a machine that can be used to answer these very serious questions. And so, my sense is that the politicians in Washington have concluded that the system can’t be all that bad because, after all, it produced them. And as long as an elected official is an elected official, then whatever machine was used, whatever device was used to elect him or her, seems to be adequate. But there’s an erosion of voting rights implicit in our inability to trust the technology that we use and if we were another country being analyzed by America, we would conclude that this country is ripe for stealing elections and for fraud.”

And Congress has refused to do anything to protect the voters or the Democratic process.

Congress refused to require that the four manufacturers make the software available for inspection (the Independent Testing Authories, or ITA's, only perform tests on the machine’s functionality and they are chosen and paid for by the manufacturers.) They do not even look (and they’re not required to look) for vote-flipping malicious code inside the software. Their reports are also kept secret.

Congress refused to require even so-called "voter verified paper audit trails" where the voter would look at a paper receipt inside the machine (not taken home with them), verify that it was correct and then allow for it, the hard copy, to be stored separately for use in the eventuality of a recount. And, further, Congress has refused to require mandatory random audits at polling stations or any other verification that the totals that are reported by the machines are, in fact, anything close to what the voters had intended.

Moreover, it is unlikely that Congress will ever solve the problems indicated in the SAIC Report. Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, (together with convicted Ohio Republican Congressman Bob Ney) led the effort to keep legislation requiring voter verified paper trails and machine transparency from ever coming to a vote in Congress, and even urged their Congressional colleagues to vote against any efforts to do so (see “Dear Colleague” Letter on March 3, 2004 and this ABCNews.com blog item.)

In other words, despite the brilliant rallying cry of their hero, Ronald Reagan, "Trust but Verify", the Republican Leadership has, in fact, created a Democracy where we are asked to do one but with no effort at all to do the other.

The leaked, un-redacted SAIC Report makes it clear that these machines are not ready for our midterm elections next week and that Diebold, and, perhaps the three other manufacturers, have been fraudulently hiding serious operational and security flaws from the states and the voters.

Unless there is emergency action undertaken by our states, we could have 468 mini Florida 2000s and the control and direction of our Congress debated for many months to come. Nonetheless, absent the ability to properly inspect the software on these machines, the best safeguard may, indeed, be for everyone to vote. The larger the turnout and, conceivably, the larger the margin of victory, one way or another, the less likely these far from proven machines will be able to alter the vote in defiance of whatever exit polling there is left.

Until we can get Diebold and the other manufacturers who hold our democracy in their corporate hand to tell the truth about their hardware and software, our democracy may hinge on people doing what it is really all about anyway: Getting out and voting.

Specifically, I wonder which government officials agreed to Diebold's conditions. Would the agreement be available via a Public Records Request?

Can a non-disclosure agreement be used to cover up a crime? Surely this can't be legal. I'd consider Diebold's claims about its system to be fraudulent, since recent examinations and hacks have shown their vulnerabilities.

"I just have to wonder though, why would SAIC let them redact their report at all, without saying something ?"

SAIC is a company. They signed a contract. Their professional standing and public relations would have taken a pounding if they had reneged on the contract... and that's not even mentioning the legal liability for violating that contract.

The fault lies with the state for agreeing to the contract. Iin essence they let Diebold dictate the terms of its testing yet again.

Diebold and the Repubs know that throwing the elections to Republicans will almost certainly result in a call for their collective heads, especially since democrats are favored by huge margins in so many races. So how do you hold onto congressional seats you are certain to lose?

YOU THROW THE VOTE GROSSLY IN FAVOR OF DEMOCRATS so that it's undeniable that the machines have been hacked. This has several advantages for Diebold and the Repubs.

--It results in a freeze on the election results that allows all the current memebers of congress to retain there seat until the issue is worked out. This could take months or years which is plenty of time for them to allow Bush to get us in more trouble.

--It creates doubt that Diebold is anything other than a Republican vote making system and makes Diebold look more like a victim than the fascist asses they really are.

--To simpleminded, stupid and naive Americans (of which there are tens of millions)It makes the democratic party look like shit.

Am I paranoid? You bet I am. After living with Bush and Rove for six years I wouldn't put ANYTHING by these guys because they will do ANYTHING to win.

We are in crisis mode but I see no leadership as far as how we mobilize on November 8th to bring the bastards down and prevent another theft of our elected offices. Do we start 24 vigils at all county courthouses? Massive march on DC and occupation of the Mall? Come on folks we only have days to be sure bags are packed, tents and food ready to go. It's cold in DC. How long are we gonna stay?
Months if necessary?

I wish Brad would start and immediate banner link and specific discussion on mobilization potentials. We are going to need it!!!!!!!!~!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When Lieberman lost in the primary to Lamont, it wasn't 36 hours later that Rove launched the False - False Flag Terror Threat in London.

During the next 24 hour news cycle while the headlines falsely screamed:

"TERROR IN THE SKIES"

The media quietly released two Israel-related stories under the radar ...

The first was that a US Submariner named Ariel Joseph Weinmann had been arrested 6 MONTHS EARLIER for Espionage on behalf of "a foreign country."

12 hours later, the story broke that the Two AIPAC Officials charged with Espionage in the Franklin/AIPAC spy scandal were still going to face trial, despite their attorney's best efforts to have the case thrown out.

These three matters, Lamont's victory over AIPAC's Lieberman, the revelation of yet another Israeli spy caught passing naval secrets to Israel, and the AIPAC Spy trial moving forward ALL hit the news at the same time - and were ALL quickly buried by a fully-complicity "news" media.

If you think these events are unrelated - in light of the subsequent admission that the entire scare was a hoax - you've already got the government you deserve.

"We don't have to debate about what we should think about homosexual activity, it's written in the bible....I think i know what you did last night, if you send me a thousand dollars I won't tell your wife"

RELATED: Haggard calls homosexuality a “sin” and “devastating for the children of our nation and for the future of Western civilization.”

No pastor in America holds more sway over the political direction of evangelicalism than does Pastor Ted, and no church more than New Life

Evangelicalism is as much an intellectual as an emotional movement; and what Pastor Ted has built in Colorado Springs is not just a battalion of spiritual warriors but a factory for ideas to arm them.

Pastor Ted soon began upsetting the devil's plans. He staked out gay bars, inviting men to come to his church; his whole congregation pitched itself into invisible battles with demonic forces, sometimes in front of public buildings.

I have to laugh at DailyKOS, they're doing it again like last election. They have articles like, "upset in the making for blah blah blah"...then when the Republican wins 51%-49%, DailyKOS will say "moral victory", and mention nothing about fraud. Like they did with Schmidt-Hackett..."moral victory"...no mention of fraud. They're doing it again!!!!!!!

With all due respect, Huffington Post runs stories on election fraud - in fact, there's at least one on the front page today. Brad's had a couple of posts there as well.

Daily Kos started out with NO interest in election fraud (I heard through the grapevine that for awhile they even DELETED diaries that mentioned it), but I've noticed there have been a FEW diaries, especially in the past several months, that were allowed to stay and drew quite a few comments.

They may be slow on the uptake, but other sites are starting to come around (albeit in baby steps) Speaking of websites - Rawstory and Buzzflash quite often have links to Bradblog articles and other articles on election reform.

If you're looking for the latest and greatest information, however, Bradblog is still the leader - ALWAYS.

Pop quiz! How many of the loveable fruitcakes yammering above are genuine beeleeveers... and how many are paid shills solely here to make those who question e-voting appear as if they must also be detached from reality?

Spotted Mule #20
You are absolutely right that there should be some organizing happening. It should have been happening long ago. I have serious doubts about the general american desire to get off their asses and protest and demand recounts.
I for one will shout my ass off.

Big Dan and Kestrel (hi Kestrel)
I agree with you about dKos. Tjhough like you said Kestrel, they have allowed a few lately. But they're generally treated with scorn. StevenD at Booman Tribune consistently rights about fraud issues. This article by Brad is frontpaged there right now. Some of us still live in reality.

!!S.D. runs short of absentee ballots!! Check out the online article in today's UT. Not enough ballots, will use photocopied ballots. When those ballots are returned, registrar's employees will copy voters' choices by hand onto regular card stock ballots that can be run through the optical scanners that count the votes.http://www.signonsandieg...103-9999-1n3ballots.html

Yes, we will have ballots filled in by poll workers and then scanned in. I already hear the sound of legal briefs being filed in contesting the now certainty of a Bilbray win.

I agree that HuffPo and Dkos are not inclined to run stories about electronic voter fraud. I noticed this too. The Left's tent is big, however, and I do not begrudge them. Lord knows there is enough to blog about when it comes to the GOP and the Administration.

Many HuffPo and Dkos commentators write and behave like they have at least one foot inside the Beltway. Live and let live.

But as to Brad's latest story, coming on the heels of the HBO presentation, I think this is a great piece of reporting. Maybe Lou Dobbs will have an interest.

I commented on a post by Susan Madrak on the Huffington Post this morning, she was full of fire:

If you tell me that, I'll tell you this: You have the wrong priorities.

I'm sick of the lack of backbone and dedication to the cause of our democracy. If you were willing to work one-tenth as hard at protecting our liberty as these bastards are at destroying it, I wouldn't be writing this now.

If these pricks steal this election, and you don't swarm every place that's connected to the theft - the election bureaus, the newspapers and TV stations, your congressman's office - if you don't stand up to be counted for democracy, then just shut up and resign yourself to being a good little cog in a fascist state for the rest of your life.

That's what they're counting on.

I agree with her 100% and will take to the street and encourage others to do the same. I asked these questions in a comment but as of now the comment has not been posted. A similar comment last night went un-posted too. I asked: what should we demand? Does that sound stupid to you? I want to know if we should demand a total recount or we demand that they throw the whole election out and re-do it with a paper ballet, in just the obviously contested area or every where?
How can we stop the Congress from seating the benefactors of a disputed election? The whole revolutionary was fought without television; the undocumented workers used cell phones - but must have had a plan, a central information place. Please give thought to these questions we need a plan. And a place to go to get the information we need. UTube can show us our fellow Americans gathering and fighting, we just need a little advance planning. PLEASE

Linda Lamone can be reached toll free at 1-800-222-8683. Please call immediately to express your outrage and demand that action be taken to ensure a fair, open, and verifiable election.
Maryland residents in particular should phone in, but it can't hurt to let her know that people from around the country an around the world are paying attention to her criminally negligent actions.

DailyKOS and Huffington Post are now part of the Mainstrem Media --- the first two "blogs" to get that status. As such, they might occasionally touch on an important issue, but they will stay away from anything "risky" or "fringe."

BE ABSOLUTELY SURE: When (if) those of us who care start going to the streets, those sites (and probably others) will NOT be on our side but will push the meme that we are "extremists" and will accept and re-publish every lie that the Republicans create.

There needs to be a "tipping point" to overcome the massive media programming that the American People have been subjected to over the last 6 years. I still meet (live and online) true Democratic Liberals and Progressives who tell me "why Kerry lost" and crap like that. They've listened to SOME Air America, but managed to miss Randi and Malloy and hear only Ed and Al. They read the New York Times and Washington Post and think they are reading a "liberal" paper because they remember the Pentagon Papers and Watergate. They think Dan Rather "made a mistake" rather than being swiftboated and necklaced.

Given that honest elections are the only way that THE PEOPLE can change their government peacefully when it has gone astray, I don't see how HONEST ELECTIONS can be anything but THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE OF OUR TIME.

With Jimbo's comment, if you watch my link from about the six minute mark on, it might not be too far fetched with all the hypocracy going on with Ted Haggard and the Repubs.
I know its Alex Jones, but I opened my mind for a few minutes to watch and its pretty compelling stuff

K: Where is there a story by Brad on HuffPo frontpage? Also, do a find on "hacking democracy" on their front page. They have a lot of traffic there, and very little to nothing about e-vote fraud. I disagree with you. Close to ZERO! And keep in mind, it's election week, so it's even worse not to do it RIGHT NOW!

K: This is election week...the blogs that know e-vote fraud is important, INCREASED their reporting on e-vote fraud! If HuffPo has one article (and I can't find it) on e-vote fraud on election week, and dkos NONE, then I question their motives. They are consciously suppressing e-vote fraud stories, they're not stupid, they know it's going on.

It's a slap in the face to Brad, Bev Harris, Mark Crispin Miller, etc, etc...not to use their high traffic sites to publicize e-vote fraud. And it's a slap in the face to us US citizens, mostly!!!

#37 KBE,
I saw that article, too & I think the GOP is ready to accuse the Dems of fraud at the first hint of any Dem victories at the polls. Although I do maintain just a faint shred of hope, largely because of Brad & his "merry band" (for lack of a better term!) & also because of a few, like Lou Dobbs, who seem to be actually LISTENING at long last & disseminating these UNBELIEVABLY DISTURBING & IMPORTANT STORIES! that most everyone in positions of power has (have?) been ignoring for so damn long!

But then I read (dammit! it's o.t. but still!) something like THIS & that shred of hope I just mentioned gets trampled & stomped on YET AGAIN:

"...Investigations led by a Republican lawyer named Stuart W. Bowen Jr. in Iraq have sent American occupation officials to jail on bribery and conspiracy charges, exposed disastrously poor construction work by well-connected companies like Halliburton and Parsons, and discovered that the military did not properly track hundreds of thousands of weapons it shipped to Iraqi security forces...

...tucked away in a huge military authorization bill that President Bush signed two weeks ago is what some of Mr. Bowen’s supporters believe is his reward for repeatedly embarrassing the administration: a pink slip...
...that terminates his federal oversight agency, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, on Oct. 1, 2007...

...The clause was inserted by the Republican side of the House Armed Services Committee over the objections of Democratic counterparts during a closed-door conference ...

...Neither the House nor the Senate version contained such a termination clause before the conference, all involved agree..."link

Re: Comment 33
San Diego County runs out of absentee ballots
Under the California Election Code they can create a duplicate ballot. But that process is required to be public. Below I am pasting the particular law related to this. They do have to give 48 hours advance notice before they start processing AB. For those in San Diego (and elsewhere) it is time to be personally and physically involved in the process.

15104. (a) The processing of absentee ballot return envelopes, and the processing and counting of absentee ballots shall be open to the public, both prior to and after the election.
(b) Any member of the county grand jury, and at least one member each of the Republican county central committee, the Democratic county central committee, and of any other party with a candidate on the ballot, and any other interested organization, shall be permitted to observe and challenge the manner in which the absentee ballots are handled, from the processing of absentee ballot return envelopes through the counting and disposition of the ballots.
(c) The elections official shall notify absentee voter observers and the public at least 48 hours in advance of the dates, times, and places where absentee ballots will be processed and counted.
(d) Absentee voter observers shall be allowed sufficiently close
access to enable them to observe and challenge whether those individuals handling absentee ballots are following established procedures, including all of the following:
(1) Verifying signatures and addresses by comparing them to voter registration information.
(2) Duplicating accurately any damaged or defective ballots.
(3) Securing absentee ballots to prevent any tampering with them before they are counted on election day.
(e) No absentee voter observer shall interfere with the orderly processing of absentee ballot return envelopes or processing and counting of absentee ballots, including touching or handling of the ballots.

I read the article that Carlo referred to. In light of the readily available Election Code I am shocked and disappointed at the passivity of the Democratic Party and the imperial attitude of Mike Haas:

The Democrats ASKED to have observers on hand.
Mike Haas said they will be ALLOWED.
The Democrats have a right to have observers on hand, and they don't have to ask Mike Haas if they can. They are granting authority to a public official who does not currently have it.

The Democratic Party has asked to have observers on hand when the ballots are remade, which Haas said will be allowed. Haas said the photocopied ballots will probably not be processed on Election Day, but during the 28-day period allowed to finish counting votes before election results are certified.

Mike Haas does not have 28 days to "finish" counting votes. At the end of the Semi-Final Canvass all votes are to be counted. At that point begins the Official Final Canvas. That period of time is to be used to verify that all the votes were counted accurately. That is why the 1% audit takes place during the Final Official Canvas. The 1% audit is required by law to be conducted within 15 days of the election. That means that all votes must be counted prior to that. The precincts to be included are not to be chosen until AFTER the conclusion of the Semi-Final Canvas.

I agree with you that there could be more on voting fraud on HuffPo. Keep in mind that the HuffPo home page doesn't display all new articles at the same time. They seem to rotate in and out blog entries depending on when you visit it. A front page blog entry may disappear when refreshing 10 minutes later and reappear on the weekend.

Big Dan - Sorry, I thought it was ancient that posted about DKOS and Huffington Post.

A lot of the information I find on DK regarding election fraud and evoting machines is buried in the open threads - takes forever to wade through it all, that's why I use the search feature when I go there. And like TomR said, the front page at Huffpo changes frequently - another reason to use the search function (when it's working)

The search engines on Daily Kos and Huffington Post don't work and play well with others sometimes. But, if you do a search on several different issues (one at a time), and don't mind wading through the results, it is possible to find articles - but I agree, they're too few and far between, and the issue doesn't get NEAR the coverage it deserves.

But that's okay, who wants to read those sources and be behind on the news cycle anyway? We've got BRADBLOG!

:-)

Besides, I don't think I've ever read anything regarding evoting problems at either site (or any OTHER site, in fact) that wasn't posted on Rawstory or Bradblog first. I do hope they're starting to pay attention.

Yes this is Big Dan's wife. This is the first time I ever posted on a blog (unlike Big Dan who never shuts up).I was watching INN and I was so surprised to see Brad was on! Bravo!!!!It was so informative and I loved to hear that you can actually watch every step of the voting process. Big Dan and I are planning to take our cameras and camcorder in case they are doing any funny business at our poling station.

This weekend is the last chance to talk to friends and family about what YOU and THEY will do on NOvember 8 when Democracy's "reality" and the neo-con's "reality" come into stark conflict and "the truth" comes into clear focus.

Remember, ants --- if there are enough of them --- can devour a lion, or even a HERD of lions.

THE PEOPLE, UNITED, WILL NEVER BE DEFEATED.

Do not let them divide us with false wedges. We are AMERICANS and PATRIOTS first and everything else second. And EVERY PATRIOT should believe that the right to have your vote counted is the SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT RIGHT in any Democracy.

"None of the documents in question were classified Top Secret," read a statement released by the lab. "None of the materials included any of the most sensitive nuclear weapons information."

But one federal official recently briefed on the issue says "It's devastating." If a nuclear weapon were stolen, the information "would tell the terrorists everything they need to do to get a weapon to fire."

or this ...
"Last March, the federal government set up a Web site to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war. The Bush administration did so under pressure from Congressional Republicans who had said they hoped to “leverage the Internet” to find new evidence of the prewar dangers posed by Saddam Hussein."

Welcome Mrs BigDan, I really enjoy your hubby's comments and he is usually ahead of the game in his thoughts. He does get fired up but that is what is great about his comments, he makes people think.

I watched Jon Stewart last night and he had a skit on electronic voting, even mentioned Diebold, but I haven't seen anything about that on the blogs. Maybe it was a repeat? He did a good job of it I thought.

For a truly fasinating and personal look at this issue, I highly recommend Dr. Aviel Rubin's new book "Brave New Ballot" (Rubin is the Computer Scientist professor/Information Security expert at Johns Hopkins, who originally exposed the Diebold treachery...and he has a lot to say about the SAIC report and the subsequent "spin" by Lamone & Diebold)

To #30 Kestrelbrighteyes
In answer to your question,"If I disagree with an ancient, will that prevent my ascention?"
The answer is never; You were given your very own brain and heart to use to get there. Hopefully more and more poeple will start using them to do just that!

To # 31 The_ZapKitty
Well, well, well ZapKitty your condescending little comment just goes to show you lack the courage or strength to face the whole truth. THIS IS PRECISELY WHY THEY KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH WHAT THEY DO!!!! Americans lack the courage and strength to face the whole shocking truth! Your just what they bank on, you can only handle one shock at a time I suspect. I'd like to say I'm sorry for rocking your rude little intellectual boat, BUT I'M NOT!

"Well, well, well ZapKitty your condescending little comment just goes to show you lack the courage or strength to face the whole truth."

I've had enough friends of ...differing views of reality... in my lifetime to not worry about such things. (Many of them of _very_ differing views.) But this does not change the fact that being different alone is enough to get you noticed in the world we actually live in... the world we must interact with if we want to make changes. Much more so if you go around spouting unpopular views. Just because you might be paranoid doesn't mean that you won't be targeted.

As for my comments... live with them. They won't hurt you But after reading around a bit I think a few, only a few, of the posts may not be what they seem... and that their enthusiastic agreement with some of the more offbeat views may have another purpose than actual support.

In discussing the media industries' habit of covertly installing spyware and worse on PCs on a variety of tech blogs there was quite a bit of that sort of posing by the media shills, actually.

"Your just what they bank on, you can only handle one shock at a time I suspect."

I multitask pretty well. As for the possibility of a "one thing at a time" mentality... hmmm... Is that better than rolling up every perceived problem in the world into one huge unmanageable mass?

Again the personal attack with the condescension, "the fact that being different alone is enough to get you noticed in the world we actually live in… the world we must interact with if we want to make changes. Much more so if you go around spouting unpopular views. Just because you might be paranoid doesn't mean that you won't be targeted." Where the fuck do you get off, who died and made you GOD? I thought this blog was where we could share info, even if people have different styles of doing that. Even if that information rocks the boat further than YOU anticipated? Pardon my spontaneity, but that's how I work when I have the time to be here, but I do check my sources for facts. So be specific and respond directly to what I post if you have a problem with it instead of the personal attacks. DUH
We're all here trying to track down the truth, just because some of the topics I've raised might not be within your "realm" of knowledge or personal agreement doesn't make them any less true. Especially in these days of unbelievable crimes. Talk about being paranoid, "But after reading around a bit I think a few, only a few, of the posts may not be what they seem… and that their enthusiastic agreement with some of the more offbeat views may have another purpose than actual support." Again, who died and made you GOD? DO YOU HAVE THE PROOF TO REFUTE THOSE UNPOPULAR VIEWS???????????? You know I really do prefer to work with people, but I don't tolerate personal attacks sitting down! Sorry I can't finish this at the moment, I have another job to do at the moment. Meanwhile, DIG DEEPER DUDE!

Yo, what in the heck are you two fighting about? I don't see Zapkitty making personal attacks... just remarking in a sort of vaguely insulting to unspecified people --- who may very well be better-informed and more courageous --- way. So?

If that is the case, Ancient, we need to save our energy for Wednesday. Pft, waste of time and vitality. Remember, snotty attitudes are the last refuge of really terrified people. Water off a duck's back... for anyone who will really risk themselves for a victory of decency in these indecent times, this stuff has to be water off a duck's back or vital energy is wasted. If that is not the case, then we will all find out soon enough. So, again, just a waste of energy.

Thanks 99, but while I was away here's what I wanted to say to Zap Kitty:(I think its worth bearing out in this forum.)
Ya know, the FULL MOON then THE ELECTIONS are commin on .......... my suggestion is, right and left brainers learn to RESPECT each other and work together, cuz really we don't need to waste time fighting. BUT, just stay away from even polite UNLOADING, please. (I DO THINK HIS COMMENTS WERE DEMEANING EVEN IF HE DOES HAVE WAY MO INFO THAN ME AND THAT WILL CONTINUE TO BE A PROBLEM NOT JUST FOR ME BUT THIS WHOLE COUNTRY!) I would suggest you listen to Claudia Schmitdt's song: Birdwings I& II on "Out of the Dark/ New Goodbyes, Old Helloes." It might help you better understand people different from you, but NO LESS than you.